This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

I'm curious - have you advocated US intervention in any number of African states practicing genocide amongst their own peoples? How about in North Korea?

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need?

I know that this is directed towards aberrant, but as I advocate intervention (in both cases) I think that I should respond as well.

If there's genocide anywhere I advocate at least some form of pressure or assistance required to end the genocide. North Korea is too close with China for me to advocate a direct military intervention, though.

Syria occupies a choke-point in the world economy, too important to be left to fascistic dictators. Our enemies in Tehran and our rivals in Moscow and Beijing all have played their cards in regards to Syria. There's always the chance for Hezbollah, or worse, al-Qaeda, to get their hands on Assad's stash of chemical weapons. And Syria, as opposed to many places in Africa, has the chance to transform into a viable democracy after the civil war.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Originally Posted by MadLib

I know that this is directed towards aberrant, but as I advocate intervention (in both cases) I think that I should respond as well.

If there's genocide anywhere I advocate at least some form of pressure or assistance required to end the genocide. North Korea is too close with China for me to advocate a direct military intervention, though.

Syria occupies a choke-point in the world economy, too important to be left to fascistic dictators. Our enemies in Tehran and our rivals in Moscow and Beijing all have played their cards in regards to Syria. There's always the chance for Hezbollah, or worse, al-Qaeda, to get their hands on Assad's stash of chemical weapons. And Syria, as opposed to many places in Africa, has the chance to transform into a viable democracy after the civil war.

...so who the hell elected us God then? We can't let it be left to fascistic dictators...as we turn America into a fascist state. We are not Syrian, we have not proper say in their government. End of story. Before running around playing god of the world, I think that we should take care of our own house.

You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville

"I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

I'm curious - have you advocated US intervention in any number of African states practicing genocide amongst their own peoples? How about in North Korea?

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need?

Yes, I would support intervening as part of a multinational coalition in instances in Africa like Rwanda and Darfur. Unfortunately the world usually looks the other way when it comes to Africa.

North Korea? No. That violates the third point I made: a reasonable chance at achieving the objectives of an intervention. Even though their people are suffering, starting a war in North Korea would be reckless because of what they could do with their nukes, the risk to Seoul, and China's backing. I think it's China's responsibility to discipline its bratty child.

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need? The number of deaths, displaced, and the prospect of a future where chemical weapons are used without restraint, and the fact that there is a reasonable chance of addressing this through intervention.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Originally Posted by Ikari

...so who the hell elected us God then? We can't let it be left to fascistic dictators...as we turn America into a fascist state. We are not Syrian, we have not proper say in their government. End of story. Before running around playing god of the world, I think that we should take care of our own house.

That would require actual work. This is just taking a stand and dropping bombs. America is good at that one.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

I'm curious - have you advocated US intervention in any number of African states practicing genocide amongst their own peoples? How about in North Korea?

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need?

Yes, I would support intervening as part of a multinational coalition in instances in Africa like Rwanda and Darfur. Unfortunately the world usually looks the other way when it comes to Africa.

North Korea? No. That violates the third point I made: a reasonable chance at achieving the objectives of an intervention. Even though their people are suffering, starting a war in North Korea would be reckless because of what they could do with their nukes, the risk to Seoul, and China's backing. I think it's China's responsibility to discipline its bratty child.

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need? The number of deaths, displaced, and the prospect of a future where chemical weapons are used without restraint, and the fact that there is a reasonable chance of addressing this through intervention.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Originally Posted by MadLib

I know that this is directed towards aberrant, but as I advocate intervention (in both cases) I think that I should respond as well.

If there's genocide anywhere I advocate at least some form of pressure or assistance required to end the genocide. North Korea is too close with China for me to advocate a direct military intervention, though.

Syria occupies a choke-point in the world economy, too important to be left to fascistic dictators. Our enemies in Tehran and our rivals in Moscow and Beijing all have played their cards in regards to Syria. There's always the chance for Hezbollah, or worse, al-Qaeda, to get their hands on Assad's stash of chemical weapons. And Syria, as opposed to many places in Africa, has the chance to transform into a viable democracy after the civil war.

I hope you're right about Syria - although, I do fail to understand how the US bombing of a few strategic facilities and weapons installations in Syria is going to bring an end to the civil war, leave alone bring a viable democracy.

It's taken a decade in Iraq, over $1 trillion in American currency, thousands of American lives, countless Iraqi lives, and even now Iraq has the most fragile of democracies and certainly lingering civil-war like tensions between factions. The Iraqi people, like Syrians, are well educated, intelligent, and generally sectarian in their outlook to government and governance, and still religious tensions spoil the mix for those who just want to survive and thrive. Clearly, Syria is far better poised to recover than Afghanistan ever will be, but still, I don't see any great improvement there for a couple of decades at best.

Are Americans prepared to own Syria for a couple of decades too?

"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Yes, I would support intervening as part of a multinational coalition in instances in Africa like Rwanda and Darfur. Unfortunately the world usually looks the other way when it comes to Africa.

North Korea? No. That violates the third point I made: a reasonable chance at achieving the objectives of an intervention. Even though their people are suffering, starting a war in North Korea would be reckless because of what they could do with their nukes, the risk to Seoul, and China's backing. I think it's China's responsibility to discipline its bratty child.

Why is Syria special in regard to humanitarian need? The number of deaths, displaced, and the prospect of a future where chemical weapons are used without restraint, and the fact that there is a reasonable chance of addressing this through intervention.

I can agree with your first two points - your last, related to Syria, however, still lacks any rationale for expecting a reasonable chance at successful intervention on the scale currently proposed by the President.

"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Originally Posted by TiredOfLife

That would require actual work. This is just taking a stand and dropping bombs. America is good at that one.

Oh, we can certainly kill the **** out of other humans, we are good at that....even killing our own. But we're not going to a better place, we're not making the Republic better; we're making it weaker. And in the end, the Republic is what matters.

You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville

"I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Re: Syria vs. Iraq

Originally Posted by CanadaJohn

I hope you're right about Syria - although, I do fail to understand how the US bombing of a few strategic facilities and weapons installations in Syria is going to bring an end to the civil war, leave alone bring a viable democracy.

It's taken a decade in Iraq, over $1 trillion in American currency, thousands of American lives, countless Iraqi lives, and even now Iraq has the most fragile of democracies and certainly lingering civil-war like tensions between factions. The Iraqi people, like Syrians, are well educated, intelligent, and generally sectarian in their outlook to government and governance, and still religious tensions spoil the mix for those who just want to survive and thrive. Clearly, Syria is far better poised to recover than Afghanistan ever will be, but still, I don't see any great improvement there for a couple of decades at best.

Are Americans prepared to own Syria for a couple of decades too?

It's impossible to impose the democracy there.
They do not want the democracy yet.
We don't like the way they treat the women but on a point each male there have a daughter and a wife. They chooses to live so.
To us it seems like they live in terrible rules or they mistreat the women but in their eyes is way too different.